I haven't yet watched the documentary, nor have i read the book.
In which case how can you make the following statement:
However, the coincidences are outrageous. Is it possible that the Australian guy did cast his cigarette away, unknowingly starting the fire. Yet, the rubbish that it lit was put there intentionally, not to start a fire with people in the stadium, but perhaps to do so afterwards, considering the stand was to be demolished straight away.
I've read the book and done a bit of background reading. There aren't any coincidences. The way the fire story has been pushed is utter bollocks. There were some fires in Bradford, some had some connection to Heginbotham but some didn't. None of them had any actual similarities to the stadium fire, despite what the headlines say and the cause and background to the fire is well understood.
The rubbish wasn't put there intentionally. Where on earth did you get that from? And why would you set fire to a stand that was about to be demolished? It's ridiculous.
Before people repeat bollocks they should at least do a bit of reading.